On a weekday at peak hours, there are up to 20+ trains an hour, with commuter trains continuing directly into Metro systems, and directly onto different commuter lines on the other end.
I often use different light/dark settings between apps and my system. Just because I want system UIs to be dark, for example, doesn't mean I want to read long pages of white-on-black prose on your blog.
Healthcare is one of the exclusive powers of the provinces, as laid out in the constitution. There are things the federal government can do, such as provide money, but provincial leaders complaining about lack of federal involvement do so in bad faith; they would certainly complain louder if the federal government overstepped their bounds. It's worth pointing out that taxation and borrowing are also constitutionally protected powers of the province.
From memory, what I would do is simply download the original ttfs or otfs, run them through woff2 (https://github.com/google/woff2), and then write the @font-face declarations for each weight/style variation. Variable fonts make this even easier, since you can get by with just the one declaration.
One could further optimise them for size with fonttools, to do stuff like subsetting by unicode ranges (https://github.com/fonttools/fonttools), but that's quite optional. Unless your font includes CJK, it's probably not that big to begin with.
What made you give up? As the article describes, self hosting fonts is as easy as making the static font files available and then adding a few lines of CSS. What solution would you want Google to offer?
Saying that Chinese people are okay, and are not necessarily represented by the actions of the Chinese state, isn't about anything more than trying to prevent violence and hate from being targeted towards ethically East Asian-looking people. There is precedence for this kind of violence, and if we're angry at China for human rights abuses, we should not breed an environment in which the human rights of Chinese people are put at risk in other countries.
Built-in Windows controls, like buttons, scroll bars, etc. are updated with each system release. However, they are relatively inflexible, and no one uses WinApi anyway, so most frameworks and apps build their own components, with varying dedication to emulating the "native" style. Built-in controls also don't perform much in the way of layout (I believe the only way to position child HWNDs remains manual absolute positions?) so while your button might look native, your collection of two buttons won't.
My guess is MacOS's consistency comes from some combination of developer incentives, and UI toolkit design.
It displays for me, in place of the favicon (but I'm on nightly, so this might be a more recent change). Here's what it looks like for me: https://imgur.com/a/EwaKsNt
Sure, but not all people who use computers are programmers, and programmers make up a small minority of computer users. Much of the value in computers come from augmenting other workloads. There are no shortage of people composing e-mails and documents, or consuming content, in non-English languages. Probably more than there are fluent English users.
I have an app installed that essentially draws over the entire view to darken the screen, while all interactions pass through transparently. It can't draw over certain areas, like some popups and the notification bar, but most of that wouldn't matter for malicious interactions.
Well, good news! I don't know when this might've changed (I have animations enabled), but I just tested it on Windows 10 2004, and the start menu doesn't animate with animations off.
I agree, there's definitely flexibility in what I expect, and what other people will likely expect. Here's the thing though: when I double-click "double-click", I could reasonably expect "double" "click" or "double-click" would be selected. I wouldn't expect it to select everything between the last and next punctuation characters (as an imperfect analogy).
For me at least, double-clicking is like fuzzy string matching. It's an imprecise behaviour by nature, but should be designed to be useful. Firefox's behaviour in the case of Japanese, but especially Chinese, often isn't useful, not because it doesn't perfectly reflect linguistic expectations, but because it usually selects too much--meaning you can't correct your selection by moving the cursor back and forth, and instead, have to stop and select using a different method.
Take the following passage:
もうこんなことは終わってほしいと願うばかりだ
Different people may break apart もうこんなことは differently, but it's hard to argue that it's one word. Chrome (and Word) separate it like this: もう こんな こと は, and whether or not you agree that each one of those parts are words, simply splitting もうこんなことは into parts semi-logically makes it smoother to edit (for me, at least! I understand most people might not be as dependent on double-click selection).
The same behaviour for Chinese is so useless that it's not even worth mentioning, since you'll always select either a large part of a sentence, or an entire sentence at once. I mean, I love the word 匹配的近似度用如下方法来度量.
I think it depends on how engrained the double-click highlight is for you. For me, I double-click by default, since I almost always want to select at a word boundary in English. As a result, when I need to select Chinese or Japanese text, I'm always annoyed when my double click (which, in my mind, should always select a word) selects a nonsensical sub-sentence instead, and I have to then re-select it manually.
I use double-click highlighting, and the reason is mostly selecting passages of text when editing. Double-click highlighting makes it so I don't have to find the precise character boundaries for the first and last words in the passage. Instead, I can just double click the first word, roughly move my mouse to hover over the last, and copy or delete that entire passage.
Firefox's approach is fairly useless in this regard. Even if it's predictable from a technical perspective, it's not predictable for a reader who naturally processes semantic breaks rather than technical ones. Unlike in English, where a space is both semantic and visual, hiragana-kanji boundaries often don't mean anything. As a result, for me at least, Firefox's breaks feel a lot more random than Chrome's, which, while dodgy, are often fine.
Having used Firefox as my main browser since 2006, I remember when I discovered this feature in Chrome, and being shocked at how much of an effect that minor improvement had for me. It's not a deal-breaker, certainly, but it's become my one big annoyance with Firefox.
Firefox, in contrast, breaks at script boundaries, so it'll select runs of Hiragana, Katakana, and Kanji. Not nearly as useful, and definitely makes copying Japanese text especially annoying.
"From the very inception, we had a vision to fix a lot of the issues with hardware, starting by getting Mono (the open-source runtime that powers Xamarin) running on a microcontroller in order to bring a modern runtime to the class of computing that powers real IoT."
Here's is the timetable for a suburban station on a commuter lines: https://train-cloud.navitime.biz/en/odakyu/railroads/timetab...
On a weekday at peak hours, there are up to 20+ trains an hour, with commuter trains continuing directly into Metro systems, and directly onto different commuter lines on the other end.